The probability for that is very high and will be answered someday as our knowledge of the universe and possible ways for the abiogenesis of life grows.Is there life beyond Earth?
Is it better to rent or to buy?
Are your thoughts liberal or conservative?
What is the best color?
Is there life beyond Earth?
Is Tampa nice or seedy?
But as of right now, is there a right or wrong answer? Is there such a thing as a non-answer answer that ever seems sufficient?The probability for that is very high and will be answered someday as our knowledge of the universe and possible ways for the abiogenesis of life grows.
"probably" ?But as of right now, is there a right or wrong answer? Is there such a thing as a non-answer answer that ever seems sufficient?
Lol - good “answer.”"probably" ?
I agree but it's hard to speak in terms of probabilities with a known case of 1. It's also hard to describe that question in common meaningful terms. It's possible that life is everywhere but that it is primitive as it was on Earth for most of our history.The probability for that is very high and will be answered someday as our knowledge of the universe and possible ways for the abiogenesis of life grows.
Point taken. But according to Robert Hazen, the earth is just an average planet with "sufficient" resources "necessary" for abiogenesis. It is by no means unique in the universe.I agree but it's hard to speak in terms of probabilities with a known case of 1. It's also hard to describe that question in common meaningful terms. It's possible that life is everywhere but that it is primitive as it was on Earth for most of our history.
Abiogenesis, the idea that life arose from nonlife more than 3.5 billion years ago on Earth. Abiogenesis proposes that the first life-forms generated were very simple and through a gradual process became increasingly complex. Biogenesis, in which life is derived from the reproduction of other life, was presumably preceded by abiogenesis, which became impossible once Earth’s atmosphere assumed its present composition.
The Oparin-Haldane theoryAlthough many equate abiogenesis with the archaic theory of spontaneous generation, the two ideas are quite different. According to the latter, complex life (e.g., a maggot or mouse) was thought to arise spontaneously and continually from nonliving matter. While the hypothetical process of spontaneous generation was disproved as early as the 17th century and decisively rejected in the 19th century, abiogenesis has been neither proved nor disproved.
https://www.britannica.com/science/abiogenesis
Astronomical observations have shown that carbonaceous compounds in the gas and solid state, refractory and icy are ubiquitous in our and distant galaxies. Interstellar molecular clouds and circumstellar envelopes are factories of complex molecular synthesis. A surprisingly large number of molecules that are used in contemporary biochemistry on Earth are found in the interstellar medium, planetary atmospheres and surfaces, comets, asteroids and meteorites, and interplanetary dust particles.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2982172/In this article we review the current knowledge of abundant organic material in different space environments and investigate the connection between presolar and solar system material, based on observations of interstellar dust and gas, cometary volatiles, simulation experiments, and the analysis of extraterrestrial matter. Current challenges in astrochemistry are discussed and future research directions are proposed.
It's not my thread and I am answering a direct question. If the question is off-topic then my answer will also be OT.To OP . NONE .
You are misinterpreting the question!!!!!!! Read it again and pay attention this time.There is No question we have no right to answer .
As the thread unfolds, therein lies the answer to my OP.A few replies and all of the answers are somewhat equally valuable, even if none of them are “right” or “wrong.”
The purpose of this thread is somewhat of an experiment to see if we decide what’s right or wrong based on our own bias towards either.
Aren't "correct or incorrect" in this case just synonyms for "right or wrong"? I don't get what point you are trying to make?Rather than right or wrong perhaps correct or incorrect accurate?
![]()
''Right'' or ''wrong'' can be subjective, whereas ''incorrect'' or ''correct'' seem to be used when we're dealing with facts. Opinions can be based on facts, but not always. Can there be right or wrong opinions? I guess, depending on how one arrives at a certain opinion.Aren't "correct or incorrect" in this case just synonyms for "right or wrong"? I don't get what point you are trying to make?
Aren't "correct or incorrect" in this case just synonyms for "right or wrong"? I don't get what point you are trying to make?
I think they're just synonyms.''Right'' or ''wrong'' can be subjective, whereas ''incorrect'' or ''correct'' seem to be used when we're dealing with facts. Opinions can be based on facts, but not always. Can there be right or wrong opinions? I guess, depending on how one arrives at a certain opinion.
Unless we're talking about abstract algebra or something...that's correct.I think they're just synonyms.
2+2=4. That's right isn't it? Correct me if I'm wrong.![]()